Just because there are people who like your suggestion doesn't mean that your suggestion is actually feasible. I am quite certain your suggestion will not be adopted and implemented by the devs because it's not practical.
Everyone had issues with the combo bar - including the devs, so it's not enough to say "I don't think I met anyone who liked the combo bar." You need to be specific about what they didn't like. Overwhelmingly, what they didn't like was the UI - especially the placement of the combat bar. Isarii being a prime example of that. Just listen to his praise of the combo bar and combat system in the From the Ashes podcast (Episode 20). Isarii also has some issues with the combo bar. He does not describe the combo bar as terrible - not even close to terrible. But, he wants significant cosmetic changes. Just like the other players in the podcast.
I asked players how they liked the combat, no one mentioned tab-target at all. On the topic of tab-target, Steven explained during PAX that players will be cable to concentrate on acquiring tab-target abilities or concentrate on acquiring action abilities. People can also concentrate on acquiring Focus abilities if they are good at the QTE or pursue non-Focus abilities if they prefer. I don't think tab-target locks as strongly as it does in EQ and WoW. I was able to kite the Mage around one of the pylons and she didn't seem to able to maintain a lock on me. She had to follow me around the pylon as I would expect to happen in NWO action combat. And, while, avoiding direct confrontation with the Tank, I was also able to use obstacles to avoid taking damage...not 100%, but it worked better than it should have.
The guy who played PvP 20+ times has nerve damage in one hand. He said he physically has issues with some games due to the nerve damage but he was able to find a comfortable method of hitting the combos. He enjoyed the Ashes combat, overall. If the combat had sucked, he would not have played it 20+ times.
For whatever reason, you seem to be obsessed with extremes. People either have to be excited about the combat or think the combat is terrible. I say "It's pre-alpha, you shouldn't judge the combat like it's the finished product" and you say I said don't judge the combat at all. I say, "The devs are not going to overhaul the combo system based on what some people say who have only watched the game but haven't played it" and you say I said the devs don't want feedback. It's not about the extremes - it's all about the middle.
I am not "excited" about the PAX combat. I expected to not enjoy the PVP, but the PvP was fun. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKFy8La8UG0 Fevir describes the combat as "meh". "Nothing was all that remarkable, nothing was all that terrible, though." I agree, the combat was "meh". But, "meh" is actually positive feedback for a pre-alpha and excellent this early in development when typically MMORPGs would not have a playable demo and especially would not have playable PvP. Even Fevir's complaint about the QTE is mostly cosmetic. I have no hype for Ashes. I have some hope for Ashes. But, after Landmark, EQNext and Revival...I'm now expecting Ashes to be vaporware. I have no feeling of excitement about the combat. The combat at PAX was OK fun. And their designs moving forward also sound feasible and potentially fun. They are off on an OK start.
The combat is not a turd. No matter how excited people are, they are not going to stand in line multiple times to repeatedly eat feces that smells and and tastes like feces. Looks like a turd - everyone agrees. But it's actually chocolate. Not OMG, amazing, gotta have more chocolate - just OK, run-of-the-mill, not bad chocolate. The combat was fun enough that people stood in line multiple times to replay the game. Because the combat was not terrible. The Ashes combat was not, for instance, as terrible as when combat was first introduced in Landmark.
I hate PvP. If the combat sucked, I would have only played the PvP once. I only played it the first time to gain better access to the devs in the middle of the demo area than I had on the outskirts of the demo area, but, the combat was fun enough that I ended up playing the PvP 5 times. If the combat sucked, Isarii would have said, "The combat was as bad as I thought it would be before I played it." Isarii didn't say that. The combat is "meh", but "meh" is good enough and positive feedback for a pre-alpha this early.
Going back to my pancake batter analogy... That pancake batter might look like it should taste like crap and should be thrown out, but it actually tastes OK. No one is overly excited by its taste, as if the finished pancakes are destined to win prizes, but it's too early to be critiquing the batter for not being firm and fluffy - batter isn't expected to be firm and fluffy. If the pancake batter actually tasted like crap, people would not be standing long-lines repeatedly to get another taste test. "This pancake batter tastes nasty and needs to be scrapped but, it's my 12th time snagging a sample!" That shit don't happen. Rather, the overwhelming response has been, "That pancake batter isn't bad. I'm surprised it tastes as good as it does this early in the process. They should add a little of this and a little of that, but they're off to a good start."
Just because there are people who like your suggestion doesn't mean that your suggestion is actually feasible. I am quite certain your suggestion will not be adopted and implemented by the devs because it's not practical.
Everyone had issues with the combo bar - including the devs, so it's not enough to say "I don't think I met anyone who liked the combo bar." You need to be specific about what they didn't like. Overwhelmingly, what they didn't like was the UI - especially the placement of the combat bar. Isarii being a prime example of that. Just listen to his praise of the combo bar and combat system in the From the Ashes podcast (Episode 20). Isarii also has some issues with the combo bar. He does not describe the combo bar as terrible - not even close to terrible. But, he wants significant cosmetic changes. Just like the other players in the podcast.
I asked players how they liked the combat, no one mentioned tab-target at all. On the topic of tab-target, Steven explained during PAX that players will be cable to concentrate on acquiring tab-target abilities or concentrate on acquiring action abilities. People can also concentrate on acquiring Focus abilities if they are good at the QTE or pursue non-Focus abilities if they prefer. I don't think tab-target locks as strongly as it does in EQ and WoW. I was able to kite the Mage around one of the pylons and she didn't seem to able to maintain a lock on me. She had to follow me around the pylon as I would expect to happen in NWO action combat. And, while, avoiding direct confrontation with the Tank, I was also able to use obstacles to avoid taking damage...not 100%, but it worked better than it should have.
The guy who played PvP 20+ times has nerve damage in one hand. He said he physically has issues with some games due to the nerve damage but he was able to find a comfortable method of hitting the combos. He enjoyed the Ashes combat, overall. If the combat had sucked, he would not have played it 20+ times.
For whatever reason, you seem to be obsessed with extremes. People either have to be excited about the combat or think the combat is terrible. I say "It's pre-alpha, you shouldn't judge the combat like it's the finished product" and you say I said don't judge the combat at all. I say, "The devs are not going to overhaul the combo system based on what some people say who have only watched the game but haven't played it" and you say I said the devs don't want feedback. It's not about the extremes - it's all about the middle.
I am not "excited" about the PAX combat. I expected to not enjoy the PVP, but the PvP was fun. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKFy8La8UG0 Fevir describes the combat as "meh". "Nothing was all that remarkable, nothing was all that terrible, though." I agree, the combat was "meh". But, "meh" is actually positive feedback for a pre-alpha and excellent this early in development when typically MMORPGs would not have a playable demo and especially would not have playable PvP. The combat is not a turd. No matter how excited people are, they are not going to stand in line multiple times to to repeatedly eat feces that smells and and tastes like feces. The combat was fun enough that people stood in line multiple times to replay the game. Because the combat was not terrible. The Ashes combat was not, for instance, as terrible as when combat was first introduced in Landmark.
I hate PvP. If the combat sucked, I would have only played the PvP once. I only played it the first time to gain better access to the devs in the middle of the demo area than I had on the outskirts of the demo area, but, the combat was fun enough that I ended up playing the PvP 5 times. If the combat sucked, Isarii would have said, "The combat was as bad as I thought it would be before I played it." Isarii didn't say that. The combat is "meh", but "meh" is good enough and positive feedback for a pre-alpha this early.
Going back to my pancake batter analogy... That pancake batter might look like it should taste like crap and should be thrown out, but it actually tastes OK. No one is overly excited by its taste, as if the finished pancakes are destined to win prizes, but it's too early to be critiquing the batter for not being firm and fluffy - batter isn't expected to be firm and fluffy. If the pancake batter actually tasted like crap, people would not be standing long-lines repeatedly to get another taste test. "This pancake batter tastes nasty and needs to be scrapped but, it's my 12th time snagging a sample!" That shit don't happen. Rather, the overwhelming response has been, "That pancake batter isn't bad. I'm surprised it tastes as good as it does this early in the process. They should add a little of this and a little of that, but they're off to a good start."
Perhaps you should actually watch my video as its just merely "one example" of what could be potentially done with visual/animated and audio que's, and have been extremely effective in other games. Why couldnt that be applied here? why wouldnt it work here?
Also that analogy is simply terrible.. .you really need to stop with it. As a Classically Trained Chef, If the batter in question wasnt up to the standard the restaurant serves it would be scrapped each and every time and a well trained and experienced Chef could easily tell the difference between a good or bad mix purely based on its consistancy.
Ultimately your analogy shows one thing, and thats a lack of knowledge within the catering industry in general.
In regards to your "TLDR" theres people in this thread that have said they didnt like it and were at PAX, There are people such as fevir who played it, and didnt llike the bar.
Currently you are choosing ONLY the peoples input who is positive and denying any claim that the system is bad.
MrStackason put the truth out there, a person who also attended the event, and despite literally telling the truth of his experience to which you can only really accept as a rational person.... Instead you "attempt" to discredit them
And in the end, all your attempts to do so are somewhat rendered pointless, simply because the developer statement during the last livestream simply makes any of your claims invalid. They have heard the feedback, and they are taking it onboard.
Will be taking a second look at the combo system and determine the purpose and how to implement it visually multiple ways"
Keyword, Multiple ways.
And finally, attempting to hijack this thread, asserting yourself as some kind of authority on this matter is laughable, and even more so when you attempt to "redirect" people to another medium, before accusing people of "extreme" views, perhaps one should look at their own actions before doing so.
My Personal feedback has been given, other peoples feedback has been given, and its been accepted by Intrepid. What they do with the information and data is up to them, but one thing for sure, its not for you to decide or control what people say, think or what content they should watch. People will decide that for themselves.
I've invested a substantial amount of money myself, probably the 3rd most expensive game I've backed. But I'm completely the opposite of most people who back games.
I think it can go either way. I acknowledge that I am probably being overly critical because of the money I've spent, just like I'm sure there are other backers that are overly supportive.
Hitting the key in the appropriate rhythm to hit a fixed sweet spot allows people to rely on muscle memory to trigger the combos and button mash them out
You have very weird notions about what button mashing and spamming are.
Triggering combos by memorizing the
rhythm of a fixed sweet spot in a QTE is spamming because once you learn
the fixed rhythm you only have to rely on muscle memory to successfully
hit the sweet spot.
Those pro basketball players, they don't have skill. They've just spent hours learning the muscle memory to score baskets from their favorite spots, and now all they do is spam from those points.
I don't see how hitting a random target is skillful, but putting in the effort to master your weapon by isn't. One of the stated goals for the combo system was skillful combat, and I don't understand how anyone can think a QTE provides that.
By that "definition", the Ashes system isn't a QTE in any case since the initiation of the QTE is not random.
The "initiation" isn't the QTE, the sweet spot is the QTE, because the sweet spot is the visual cue you need to respond to and the sweet spot is random. Whether the initiation is random or not doesn't matter.
A fixed sweet spot would still test reaction - what your quote calls
split-second controller responses. A fixed sweet spot would no longer
test focus once the rhythm of the fixed solution was memorized.
Do you not see the contradiction in your words? If you are no longer watching for the visual cue because you have the rhythm memorized then you aren't reacting to anything, you are hitting the key in the appropriate rhythm for your weapon. There's nothing in there about reaction.
I've invested a substantial amount of money myself, probably the 3rd most expensive game I've backed. But I'm completely the opposite of most people who back games.
I think it can go either way. I acknowledge that I am probably being overly critical because of the money I've spent, just like I'm sure there are other backers that are overly supportive.
Hitting the key in the appropriate rhythm to hit a fixed sweet spot allows people to rely on muscle memory to trigger the combos and button mash them out
You have very weird notions about what button mashing and spamming are.
Triggering combos by memorizing the
rhythm of a fixed sweet spot in a QTE is spamming because once you learn
the fixed rhythm you only have to rely on muscle memory to successfully
hit the sweet spot.
Those pro basketball players, they don't have skill. They've just spent hours learning the muscle memory to score baskets from their favorite spots, and now all they do is spam from those points.
I don't see how hitting a random target is skillful, but putting in the effort to master your weapon by isn't. One of the stated goals for the combo system was skillful combat, and I don't understand how anyone can think a QTE provides that.
By that "definition", the Ashes system isn't a QTE in any case since the initiation of the QTE is not random.
The "initiation" isn't the QTE, the sweet spot is the QTE, because the sweet spot is the visual cue you need to respond to and the sweet spot is random. Whether the initiation is random or not doesn't matter.
A fixed sweet spot would still test reaction - what your quote calls
split-second controller responses. A fixed sweet spot would no longer
test focus once the rhythm of the fixed solution was memorized.
Do you not see the contradiction in your words? If you are no longer watching for the visual cue because you have the rhythm memorized then you aren't reacting to anything, you are hitting the key in the appropriate rhythm for your weapon. There's nothing in there about reaction.
I see that combo bar getting tedious before players even hit level 5.
If it's used for skills that have a cooldown, sure, it'll work and I can see it being a mechanic that can separate the laid back players from the "leet" players.
But as something that's tied to the "auto attack" ability.... No. This will drive people away because new players will think they're required/supposed to hit that sweet spot 100% of the time and they'll be turned off by that. Not to mention how tedious it will rapidly become, as I've already mentioned.
The people who do stick around will fall into two camps. One, those who just outright ignore it because "why bother" and Two, those who think you're a scrub if you don't use it and think it must be used at all times always even when you're afk.
What "Extremes"? A lot of this is your assumption.
Apparently, you didn't even read what I wrote.
Extremes, as in the combat either has to be terrible or awesome.
As in, the you asserting that the combat is so terrible that liking the combat must be due to Buyer Bias, etc.
Perhaps you should actually watch my video as its just merely "one example" of what could be potentially done with visual/animated and audio que's, and have been extremely effective in other games. Why couldn't that be applied here? why wouldn't it work here?
Also that analogy is simply terrible.. .you really need to stop with it.
Here is another example of your extremist thinking.
For some -rather bizarre reason- you think that if I disagree with your suggestions I haven't actually watched your video. I watched your video right after I got back from PAX - Sept 5. When I started posting in this thread dedicated to the video.
It's just bizarre that you can't make simple connections like that.
1: In Ashes combat, the QTE is only triggered by key #1. You do not need to look at the key to press it. You look at the slider bar - which doesn't have to be at the bottom of the screen - that will be customizable. Primary complaint everyone had, but that didn't make the combat terrible.
2: The spell effect example from Unity 3D isn't feasible because there is no practical way to add in the concept of hitting the randomized sweet spot.
It might be somewhat possible with the conceit that the spellcaster is also charging spells, though still somewhat problematic since it's starting from a basic attack.
But, it completely falls apart with other weapons like daggers and swords, etc.
There is no feasible translation for hitting the randomized sweet spot with those weapons.
As a Classically Trained Chef, If the batter in question wasnt up to the standard the restaurant serves it would be scrapped each and every time and a well trained and experienced Chef could easily tell the difference between a good or bad mix purely based on its consistency.
You simply suck at analogies.
Intrepid would be the restaurant. And Jeff Bard would be the classically trained chef.
You would be the untrained consumer who is merely looking at the batter in a video.
Of course, Jeff and Intrepid will scrap a feature on their own if it doesn't meet their standards. What they aren't going to do is toss their food out because some consumer didn't like the way it looked on a YouTube video.
In regards to your "TLDR" theres people in this thread that have said they didn't like it and were at PAX, There are people such as fevir who played it, and didn't like the bar.
Currently you are choosing ONLY the peoples input who is positive and denying any claim that the system is bad.
Again, noooo.
For one thing I linked to Fevir twice in my previous post. You say Fevir didn't like the bar and then say I'm only choosing the people who's input is positive. Which is again bizarre!!! Fevir's input is mixed. He states that the combat is "meh". I agree. He has issues with the QTE bar. Mostly cosmetic. Most people do. He also says, "Nothing was remarkable; nothing was all that terrible." So.... as I've been saying... the combat was not terrible. Even though Fevir has issues with the QTE, especially the cosmetics and positioning - it wasn't terrible. That's it.
I haven't said anything like, "Everyone liked the QTE bar." Rather, what I said is that the vast majority did not think that the QTE bar makes the combat terrible. Again, it's all about the middle.
I am denying that the system is "bad", yes. But, I am also not saying that the system is great. The system is "meh". But, "meh" is positive for first iteration playable combat during pre-alpha - especially. Everyone agrees that the system needs more work - especially the cosmetics and placement of the UI. The devs are going to be making extensive changes to the UI: 1: Because it's pre-alpha and they finished the first iteration of the combo system mere hours before PAX. 2: They are going to be make adjustments to the QTE based on feedback from players at PAX - especially regarding cosmetics and placement. 3: They will continue to work on the QTE because most people did not complain about the mechanics of the QTE, rather they complained about the presentation of the QTE.
MrStackason put the truth out there, a person who also attended the event, and despite literally telling the truth of his experience to which you can only really accept as a rational person.... Instead you "attempt" to discredit them.
And here's another example of your extremist, delusional reactions
I did not discredit McStackerson's experience.
He told his truth.
Primarily what I said is that simply saying, "I don't think I met anyone who liked the combo bar," doesn't really tell us much because pretty much everyone had issues with the combo bar, especially placement and cosmetics. That's not the same thing as saying, "I think everyone I met wants the devs need to move away from UI-based quick-time events or mini-games during combat."
Most people didn't like the QTE bar. That is true.
That doesn't mean that most people thought that the devs need to move away from using it. Most people were content with the dev response that we will be able to customize it.
And in the end, all your attempts to do so are somewhat rendered pointless, simply because the developer statement during the last livestream simply makes any of your claims invalid. They have heard the feedback, and they are taking it onboard.
Um. The last livestream is in agreement with what I've been saying.
What would make my claims invalid is if they take your advice and move away from a UI-based QTE and use spell effects and weapon glimmers as the visual cues for the QTE.
The devs didn;t say they were doing that in the last livestream.
My Personal feedback has been given, other peoples feedback has been given, and its been accepted by Intrepid. What they do with the information and data is up to them, but one thing for sure, its not for you to decide or control what people say, think or what content they should watch. People will decide that for themselves.
Which is another bizarre statement - as if that is somehow counter to anything I've said.
All feedback has been accepted by Intrepid. No one has claimed otherwise.
I have no control over what people say or watch - and I'm not trying to control what people say or watch.
People can say anything they want to or watch anything they want to in these forums as far as I'm concerned - I share info; I don't censor info.
People can decide who or what they want to believe - it's a free world.
What "Extremes"? A lot of this is your assumption.
Apparently, you didn't even read what I wrote.
Extremes, as in the combat either has to be terrible or awesome.
As in, the you asserting that the combat is so terrible that liking the combat must be due to Buyer Bias, etc.
Perhaps you should actually watch my video as its just merely "one example" of what could be potentially done with visual/animated and audio que's, and have been extremely effective in other games. Why couldn't that be applied here? why wouldn't it work here?
Also that analogy is simply terrible.. .you really need to stop with it.
Here is another example of your extremist thinking.
For some -rather bizarre reason- you think that if I disagree with your suggestions I haven't actually watched your video. I watched your video right after I got back from PAX - Sept 5. When I started posting in this thread dedicated to the video.
It's just bizarre that you can't make simple connections like that.
1: In Ashes combat, the QTE is only triggered by key #1. You do not need to look at the key to press it. You look at the slider bar - which doesn't have to be at the bottom of the screen - that will be customizable. Primary complaint everyone had, but that didn't make the combat terrible.
2: The spell effect example from Unity 3D isn't feasible because there is no practical way to add in the concept of hitting the randomized sweet spot.
It might be somewhat possible with the conceit that the spellcaster is also charging spells, though still somewhat problematic since it's starting from a basic attack.
But, it completely falls apart with other weapons like daggers and swords, etc.
There is no feasible translation for hitting the randomized sweet spot with those weapons.
As a Classically Trained Chef, If the batter in question wasnt up to the standard the restaurant serves it would be scrapped each and every time and a well trained and experienced Chef could easily tell the difference between a good or bad mix purely based on its consistency.
You simply suck at analogies.
Intrepid would be the restaurant. And Jeff Bard would be the classically trained chef.
You would be the untrained consumer who is merely looking at the batter in a video.
Of course, Jeff and Intrepid will scrap a feature on their own if it doesn't meet their standards. What they aren't going to do is toss their food out because some consumer didn't like the way it looked on a YouTube video.
In regards to your "TLDR" theres people in this thread that have said they didn't like it and were at PAX, There are people such as fevir who played it, and didn't like the bar.
Currently you are choosing ONLY the peoples input who is positive and denying any claim that the system is bad.
Again, noooo.
For one thing I linked to Fevir twice in my previous post. You say Fevir didn't like the bar and then say I'm only choosing the people who's input is positive. Which is again bizarre!!! Fevir's input is mixed. He states that the combat is "meh". I agree. He has issues with the QTE bar. Mostly cosmetic. Most people do. He also says, "Nothing was remarkable; nothing was all that terrible." So.... as I've been saying... the combat was not terrible. Even though Fevir has issues with the QTE, especially the cosmetics and positioning - it wasn't terrible. That's it.
I haven't said anything like, "Everyone liked the QTE bar." Rather, what I said is that the vast majority did not think that the QTE bar makes the combat terrible. Again, it's all about the middle.
I am denying that the system is "bad", yes. But, I am also not saying that the system is great. The system is "meh". But, "meh" is positive for first iteration playable combat during pre-alpha - especially. Everyone agrees that the system needs more work - especially the cosmetics and placement of the UI. The devs are going to be making extensive changes to the UI: 1: Because it's pre-alpha and they finished the first iteration of the combo system mere hours before PAX. 2: They are going to be make adjustments to the QTE based on feedback from players at PAX - especially regarding cosmetics and placement. 3: They will continue to work on the QTE because most people did not complain about the mechanics of the QTE, rather they complained about the presentation of the QTE.
MrStackason put the truth out there, a person who also attended the event, and despite literally telling the truth of his experience to which you can only really accept as a rational person.... Instead you "attempt" to discredit them.
And here's another example of your extremist, delusional reactions
I did not discredit McStackerson's experience.
He told his truth.
Primarily what I said is that simply saying, "I don't think I met anyone who liked the combo bar," doesn't really tell us much because pretty much everyone had issues with the combo bar, especially placement and cosmetics. That's not the same thing as saying, "I think everyone I met wants the devs need to move away from UI-based quick-time events or mini-games during combat."
Most people didn't like the QTE bar. That is true.
That doesn't mean that most people thought that the devs need to move away from using it. Most people were content with the dev response that we will be able to customize it.
And in the end, all your attempts to do so are somewhat rendered pointless, simply because the developer statement during the last livestream simply makes any of your claims invalid. They have heard the feedback, and they are taking it onboard.
Um. The last livestream is in agreement with what I've been saying.
What would make my claims invalid is if they take your advice and move away from a UI-based QTE and use spell effects and weapon glimmers as the visual cues for the QTE.
The devs didn;t say they were doing that in the last livestream.
My Personal feedback has been given, other peoples feedback has been given, and its been accepted by Intrepid. What they do with the information and data is up to them, but one thing for sure, its not for you to decide or control what people say, think or what content they should watch. People will decide that for themselves.
Which is another bizarre statement - as if that is somehow counter to anything I've said.
All feedback has been accepted by Intrepid. No one has claimed otherwise.
I have no control over what people say or watch - and I'm not trying to control what people say or watch.
People can say anything they want to or watch anything they want to in these forums as far as I'm concerned - I share info; I don't censor info.
People can decide who or what they want to believe - it's a free world.
And once again if you actually watched the video i described everything as standard fair. Which is neither awesome or Terrible.
You keep calling me delusional and an extremist, which are just personal attacks at this point with zero foundation or proof of such things.
My Buyers Bias statement was actually against stevens statement of "Overwhelmingly Positive". Nice you can remove things from Context though.
Regarding the "anology" yes it is badly formed, and yes the batter if poorly made would be thrown away. It doesnt even take an expert to see how flawed a QTE in combat is, and even Cabal Online proved this, and was even completely removed from Cabal Online 2. While im not a game designer, I am a game critic, in this situation I would be a the critic, and if I was in the Kitchen (which if were assuming this analogy to be "exact" as usually we wouldnt see such early footage, id assume id be inside the Kitchen to see it being made, if I saw the pancake mix was poorly made, I would say so. Sure I could wait and see what it would turn out like, but then its too late, its been cooked, its made. You cant "unmake it".
So yes, your analogy is poorly formed, and the catering industry is vastly different from the game design industry for the analogy to even be remotely valid, because in the game industry, you can FIX problems before they occur. You can IMPROVE things, add things, and most importantly, take away things. If I add to much of one ingredient into the pancake mix, I cannot remove it, I cannot change it, by this point its already ruined.
And thats why this input is valid, because changes can be made from the input myself and others have provided.
How is what i said delusional? Another personal attack, I even said "his truth". You were the one trying to "discredit" his statement. Not I.
In agreement with you? How so, they didnt use a poorly formed analogy, and constantly contridict themselves. You took one stance, and through about 10 pages of discussion you have shifted you stances several times, to the point where you have contridicted yourself several times. @mycroft Even kindly pointed out all the contridictions for you.
And multiple ways implies that you are incorrect. Its not just UI elements but more.
You keep saying nothing contridicts what you have said.... but honestly go back and look at what you have said. Obvious contridictions. Mycroft even pointed out some for you.
You have very weird notions about what button mashing and spamming are. It's the reverse - you have weird notions of what button-mashing and spamming are.
Those pro basketball players, they don't have skill. They've just spent hours learning the muscle memory to score baskets from their favorite spots, and now all they do is spam from those points.
Relying on muscle memory is also a skill.
Once the fixed rhythm of a QTE is relegated to muscle memory, a player won't have to rely on hand-eye coordination anymore to successfully complete those combos.
Playing basketball in real life does not include involve a QTE, keyboards or controllers.
Some basketball players can rely on muscle memory to hit free-throws blindfolded. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=us1i4ihrxbM
I don't see how hitting a random target is skillful, but putting in the effort to master your weapon by isn't. One of the stated goals for the combo system was skillful combat, and I don't understand how anyone can think a QTE provides that.
I really have no clue what you're talking about here.
You are the one using the term "skillful". I haven't said anything about one thing being skillful and another thing not skillful.
I don't know that the effort to master your weapon is "skillful".
But, yeah, a person can be a skillful weapon master in a wide variety of ways.
Um. If your weapon has a bunch of skills on it -which advanced weapons will- and it takes player skill to successfully hit the random sweet spots in the QTE to trigger those skills -which it will- then the QTE provides skillful combat.
Again, tapping out the correct rhythm to successfully hit fixed sweet spots of the QTE combos is skillful.
Spamming and button-mashing can be skillful.
Passing a ball to a teammate by throwing it is skillful. Passing a ball to a teammate by kicking it is skillful. Which type pf passing the rules allow depends on the specific sport.
You can't pass the ball by kicking it in basketball. You can't pass the ball by throwing it in soccer (there are exceptions, I know).
The devs want the weapon combo system to require more focus and deliberation than simply mashing buttons quickly - especially simply memorizing key combos and cooldown rotations. Which is why the QTE includes a random sweet spot.
The random sweet spot prevents players from memorizing the timing - which would always be the exact same timing/rhythm with a fixed sweet spot.
Do you not see the contradiction in your words? If you are no longer watching for the visual cue because you have the rhythm memorized then you aren't reacting to anything, you are hitting the key in the appropriate rhythm for your weapon. There's nothing in there about reaction.
Reaction - an action performed or a feeling experienced in response to a situation or event.
If you perform the action of pressing the 1 key in order to hit the sweet spot at any point during the quick time event, you are -by definition- reacting.
Doesn't matter whether it is a fixed sweet spot or a random sweet spot.
So, there is no contradiction.
If you have memorized the rhythm of the fixed sweet spot, what you are reacting to is your first press of the 1 key. You don't have to see the bar. You could base the subsequent key presses on the fixed rhythm of the correct presses starting after you press the 1 key to initiate the QTE. If you memorize the correct rhythm.
But, because the sweet spot is random in the PAX QTE, you can't simply memorize the timing. rather you have to pay attention to where the sweet spot is each time a new QTE is triggered - in order to successfully hit the sweet spot.
mycroft said: Its almost as if the fixed sweet spot wouldn't be a QTE at all.
Uh no. Fixed sweet spot would still be a QTE.
It just would not require the same amount of focused attention to successfully complete as a random QTE.
You could button-mash a QTE combo with a fixed sweet spot, if you memorized the fixed timing that the marker hits the sweet spot.
Spamming/Button-mashing - pressing buttons in rapid succession to activate available abilities. Commonly in the hopes of triggering special combos.
Doesn't that mean, by your own definition, that you cannot button mash a fixed sweet spot QTE except under a single condiition: that the sweet spot would be at the very beginning of the bar, which I think we can all agree would not happen.
There are button mashing games out there, based around the whole principle but button mashing and QTE are opposing design principles.
No. It doesn't mean that. Because the button mashing doesn't have to begin immediately after the QTE begins. The button-mashing would begin the first time the marker meets the fixed sweet spot. The memorized rhythm would include rest notes to match the spaces on either side of the fixed sweet spot.
Once you start the combo, you would be pressing buttons in rapid succession to match the rate of QTEs that are triggered in rapid succession.
Tab target and action are typically opposing design principles, too. But, this is precisely why the QTE will have a random sweet spot rather than the fixed sweet spot mycroft hopes for.
No. It doesn't mean that. Because the button mashing doesn't have to begin immediately after the QTE begins. The button-mashing would begin the first time the marker meets the fixed sweet spot. The memorized rhythm would include rest notes to match the spaces on either side of the fixed sweet spot.
Once you start the combo, you would be pressing buttons in rapid succession to match the rate of QTEs that are triggered in rapid succession.
Tab target and action are typically opposing design principles, too. But, this is precisely why the QTE will have a random sweet spot rather than the fixed sweet spot mycroft hopes for.
I can see why people get frustrated when discussing things with you. You have posted a definition of button mashing, but don't seem to understand the definition you posted, or at the least how to apply it to a specific situation.
Have you played God of War? Button mashing to the extreme.
Button mashing is not, hit a button, wait, hit a button, wait, hit a button, wait. It's not even hit hit, wait, hit hit, wait. It is hit a button, hit, hit, hit, hit, hit, hit, hit, hit as quickly as you can.
The moment you start button mashing during a QTE you fail. Fixed or random, button mashing with a QTE is a fail.
Your argument won't fundamentally change, I think everyone has a solid feel for it by now, but please use terminology correctly because if you don't everything just seems ambiguous and the discussion just starts spiraling - which I think has been happening for a while here.
That can be button mashing to the extreme. Rapid succession doesn't necessarily mean button mashing to the extreme. Button-mashing does not inherently mean as quickly as you can.
At what point having a rest note in the rhythm of a QTE combo with a fixed sweet spot is no longer button-mashing depends on at least a couple of factors. The speed with which the the marker travels across the bar. The speed with which the subsequent QTE triggers after a successful hit on the sweet spot. The length of the sweet spot. The Ashes combos for the Tank's sword are pretty quick, you'd barely need a rest note if the sweet spots were fixed.
If you make a bar were the marker travels slowly to meet the sweet spot and the spaces on either side of the sweet spot are wide enough for a long wait - then, yeah, that is probably a slow time event rather than a quick time event.
DeathsProxy said: Just a note, Isarii also agreed the changes i suggested would indeed be an improvement. As he finds the current implementation terrible (which we are discussing) but he likes the idea/concept of it.
DeathsProxy said: Just a note, Isarii also agreed the changes i suggested would indeed be an improvement. As he finds the current implementation terrible (which we are discussing) but he likes the idea/concept of it.
Isarii thought from the preview vid that he wouldn't like the combat, but when he actually tried, he found it to be fun. Enough so that he played the PvP 12 times over the course of 4 days. A PC Gamer journalist thought he hated the combat before he played it. When he actually played it, he enjoyed the combat immensely.
"Idea, and not the exact implementation"
And once again, this is just one guys opinion, and for every person that you could find that played and liked it, I could find someone who played and didnt like it. So your initial attempt to sway someone and people in this thread into the position of "Its fun if you played it, and ill only provide examples of people that enjoyed it and not those that dont" is flawed from the start.
If you were unbiased when you replied to that guy with:
"Isarii thought from the preview vid that he wouldn't like the combat, but when he actually tried, he found it to be fun. Enough so that he played the PvP 12 times over the course of 4 days. A PC Gamer journalist thought he hated the combat before he played it. When he actually played it, he enjoyed the combat immensely."
Then you would also of provided examples of people who didnt enjoy it, because your whole stance WAS "if you played it you would find it fun" where the reality is, "If you played it, you may or may not of found it fun".
MrStackerson Didnt find it fun. Fevir didnt find it fun. People in my youtube comments who played didnt find it fun and theres over 400 comments and growing just for that video alone.... Several blog posts, which ive already linked also display the same distaste for issues with the current iteration.
On top of this you provide no examples of why my suggestion wouldn't work of using audio/visual/animated ques, meanwhile many titles have successfully used them, Zelda BoTW, Dark Souls Series, Dauntless, Monster Hunter, Tera Online.... this list is actually pretty extensive of games that have used them successfully.
How many games are praised for using a QTE system? I think Resident Evil 4 when it released. Some console titles use them for cutscenes..... Rarely are they ever used as a combat mechanic, and when they are, for example the original "God Of War" game and Cabal online they are met with criticism, nor did those systems get carried over to sequels, in God of Wars case, were pushed back to being a cutscene type of QTE only.
Ultimately you can argue about the extreme's of "words" and the semantics, but generally when this begins to happen, its because you lost your inital arguement, and thats pretty much what happened here. You claims were debunked, your initial argument fell flat, and now you are nitpicking every detail to "claim back" some ground. Thats why you resorted to personal attacks, thats why you are arguing over semantics now.
And once again its all irrelevant if you think the feedback is good or not, if you think my suggest is good or bad or not, because simply alot of people who did and didnt play agree with my judgement, which unlike your stance, now has some actual merit to it.
Even people who you are trying to use to "re-enforce" your own arguement, like the concept and what my video had to offer. Which simply undermines any point you try to make when using them as an "alternative" opinion, when those people agree with my suggestion/judgement.
My judgement as displayed in the video is fair. If anything people criticise me for being too fair.
JASON: It seems like though, the online feedback is a little more negative.
Wheareas you talk to people here, it seems almost all positive.
STEVEN: All positive.
JASON: So I think it's maybe something you actually have to get your hands on and actually feel.
STEVEN: It is absolutely. I mean here's the big thing about the pre-alpha experience. I mean this is an entirely iterative process. Meaning, we're going to go through many different changes as we bring it out to alpha and beta. And a big part of making a quick time event or combat kinda situation more fluidic and comfortable is that UI aspect, right? I mean, we don't want people looking down on the screen or anything like that or away from the visual of the game. So, we're going to have a highly customizable way that each player can move around each individual element of the UI. They can change it from a bar to a circle... they can basically make it the way that they want to and feel good with it.
Obviously, we're going to take into account feedback, but honestly, from here, everyone has been extremely positive with this combat system, with the world, with the graphics, with the characters, and the skills that are being played. It's been awesome.
1: So, Jeff Bard saying, "If everyone hated the combo system, we would probably get rid of it," is a facetious, past-tense example - because according to Steven, everyone didn't hate the combo system. Rather everyone was extremely positive, from his point of view. And, while they may make changes to the combo system, that's really going to be based on the feedback from the people who played it rather than the people who only watched the videos, but haven't played.
They are going to stay on track with the design of the combo system being a QTE UI element - regardless of negative feedback from some people who only watched the videos, but haven't played.
2: I have never said anything like the devs don't want feedback because it's a pre-alpha or the devs only want positive feedback.
What I said with my original pancake batter analogy (and you can go back and look) is, don't delude yourself into thinking that the only way for the devs to know something like the Mage's face is ugly is if we tell them. It's pre-alpha. The devs most likely already know that the Mage's face is ugly and plan to change it. Other people, besides us, may have told them that. Steven's husband might tell him that. All kinds of ways for them to figure that out, if they don't know already - but, we give the feedback anyways in case they don't know and no one ever tells them.
It would be absurd to think that the only reason why the devs changed the ugly face of the Mage is because you told them they should.
It's not absurd to give negative feedback - it's absurd to believe that the only way for them to know your concern is if you tell them.
It is also absurd to judge a pre-alpha version of a project as if it's the finished product.
Stating that frozen pancakes are terrible because they are ice-cold instead of hot and fluffy and thinking that the only way for the makers of the frozen pancakes to know that they are ice cold is if you, the consumer, tell them is absurd.
They know it's ice cold. It's supposed to be at that point in the developmental process. More has to be done (heating/warming) before it's ready to be eaten as the finished.
You can give negative feedback, but give negative feedback that is appropriate for the stage of development rather than judging it as if it's completely finished - and understand that how something appears in a video may not be accurate to how it actually is in person.
What looks like a turd in a video may actually be chocolate in person.
(My whole stance was not: If you played it, you would find it fun. My stance is that it was demonstrably not objectively terrible because people are not going to stand for 18 hours in a line to repeatedly play something that is not fun. I've stated many times that my stance is pretty much the same as Fevir's - it is not good, but it also isn't bad. It is meh. But, meh is actually a positive at this point in development. What I said is that people can't give an accurate assessment of it just by watching it - because the common experience at PAX was that people like the combat more than they were expecting to prior to actually playing it. As Isarii experienced, as Fevir experienced, as I experienced and as Jason and Steven mention in the video I've shared in this post. I think you would most likely find that playing it is not as terrible as you think - I have no clue whether you would go so far as to think it was fun - some people, I assume, only played the demo once. Maybe you don't like chocolate, or that type of chocolate - some people don't like chocolate. But, you would learn that it's not actually feces despite how it appears on YouTube. Again, I'm talking about stuff in the middle and you are going to an extreme. My main point is the message in the video above - Steven's experience of PAX was that despite the negative feedback from online viewers, everyone who played the demo was extremely positive - so they are going to focus on the feedback from the people who played the demo rather than the feedback of people who did not play the demo, but only watched the vids - because it was common for people who had a negative opinion from watching the combat online to a positive view after playing it.)
3: If the devs get rid of the QTE, great! I've explained why I'm quite confident that they won't. But, if they do... great!
If the devs make the sweet spot on the QTE fixed rather than random, great! I've explained why I'm quite confident that they won't. But, if they do...great!
If the devs decide, instead, to make weapons or characters or weapon abilities glow/glimmer, great. I've explained why I'm quite confident that they won't. But, if they do...great!
I'm tired of arguing about stuff that should not be a heated argument. And, I'm tired of explaining stuff I think should be easily understood.
JASON: It seems like though, the online feedback is a little more negative.
Wheareas you talk to people here, it seems almost all positive.
STEVEN: All positive.
Except, it wasnt all positive, several sources already confirmed to be at PAX and didnt give "positive" responses. Thats confirmed to be false "All positive" would be an extreme you "hate" no?
JASON: So I think it's maybe something you actually have to get your hands on and actually feel.
STEVEN: It is absolutely. I mean here's the big thing about the pre-alpha experience. I mean this is an entirely iterative process. Meaning, we're going to go through many different changes as we bring it out to alpha and beta. And a big part of making a quick time event or combat kinda situation more fluidic and comfortable is that UI aspect, right? I mean, we don't want people looking down on the screen or anything like that or away from the visual of the game. So, we're going to have a highly customizable way that each player can move around each individual element of the UI. They can change it from a bar to a circle... they can basically make it the way that they want to and feel good with it.
Obviously, we're going to take into account feedback, but honestly, from here, everyone has been extremely positive with this combat system, with the world, with the graphics, with the characters, and the skills that are being played. It's been awesome.
Everyone knows its pre-alpha. Everyone knows its going to change. Also to note, my video and feedback was seen prior to PAX. And all my complains hold true even after people have tested it. How it gets changed depends on feedback, and not just by those that played, but by those who potentially will and wont play, as they are all potential customers in the end.
1: So, Jeff Bard saying, "If everyone hated the combo system, we would probably get rid of it," is a facetious, past-tense example - because according to Steven, everyone didn't hate the combo system. Rather everyone was extremely positive, from his point of view. And, while they may make changes to the combo system, that's really going to be based on the feedback from the people who played it rather than the people who only watched the videos, but haven't played.
They are going to stay on track with the design of the combo system being a QTE UI element - regardless of negative feedback from some people who only watched the videos, but haven't played.
"Everyone" was a handful of the games population at PAX, and once again, its already been proven that "everyone" wasnt positive. Fevir/Blogs/Articles/News pieces and even people like Mr.Stackerson here. So no, not "everyone" was extremely positive.
Thats clearly just PR. One needs to seperate PR from Reality, and no it wasnt just from those that played, also a fallacy, it was "weighted" more to those that played, but it doesnt outright ignore online feedback. And if people could and did reque MULTIPLE times, then the sample size of people at PAX is most likely quite small, and also full of dedicated fans, who are not critics in any regard. When you go to buy a graphics card, do you ask an Nvidia Fanboy, a AMD fanboy or a 3rd party who is neutral or unbiased? Seems like a no-brainer....
2: I have never said anything like the devs don't want feedback because it's a pre-alpha or the devs only want positive feedback.
What I said with my original pancake batter analogy (and you can go back and look) is, don't delude yourself into thinking that the only way for the devs to know something like the Mage's face is ugly is if we tell them. It's pre-alpha. The devs most likely already know that the Mage's face is ugly and plan to change it. Other people, besides us, may have told them that. Steven's husband might tell him that. All kinds of ways for them to figure that out, if they don't know already - but, we give the feedback anyways in case they don't know and no one ever tells them.
It would be absurd to think that the only reason why the devs changed the ugly face of the Mage is because you told them they should.
It's not absurd to give negative feedback - it's absurd to believe that the only way for them to know your concern is if you tell them.
Funny that you mentioned that.
"They only know what changes to make if you provide feedback though" holds up. And you contricted yourself. I see the issue you have now. YOU assumed, that the feedback is just from "ONE" group. However I just said if feedback is provided, and just as you said, feedback can come from many different sources, including people at Intrepid. If no one said anything, people would assume its fine. Thus its important feedback is given.
So yes, feedback has to be given to make changes, wether thats steven giving feedback to his own staff, his staff giving feedback to him, the community giving feedback, his mother giving feedback etc etc. So yeah thats completely on you for assuming I was talking about a specific group of people. Also that analogy really is bad.....
So good job contridicting yourself yet again. As my teacher said, you cant teach consistancy.
And no i didnt give feedback assuming it was a "final product". I stated several times in my video that its pre-alpha, and im judging it as a pre-alpha. I mean really....... everyone who follows the game knows this, anyone who doesnt and watches my content gets pre-alpha repeated at them 1000 times. No one is judging this game as a fully finished product... lol.....
(My whole stance was not: If you played it, you would find it fun. My stance is that it was demonstrably not objectively terrible because people are not going to stand for 18 hours in a line to repeatedly play something that is not fun. I've stated many times that my stance is pretty much the same as Fevir's - it is not good, but it also isn't bad. It is meh. But, meh is actually a positive at this point in development. What I said is that people can't give an accurate assessment of it just by watching it - because the common experience at PAX was that people like the combat more than they were expecting to prior to actually playing it. As Isarii experienced, as Fevir experienced, as I experienced and as Jason and Steven mention in the video I've shared in this post. I think you would most likely find that playing it is not as terrible as you think - I have no clue whether you would go so far as to think it was fun - some people, I assume, only played the demo once. Again, I'm talking about stuff in the middle and you are going to an extreme. My main point is the message in the video above - Steven's experience of PAX was that despite the negative feedback from online viewers, everyone who played the demo was extremely positive - so they are going to focus on the feedback from the people who played the demo rather than the feedback of people who did not play the demo, but only watched the vids - because it was common for people who had a negative opinion from watching the combat online to a positive view after playing it.
Yeah people invested in the game, looking to make a name for themselves totally wouldnt stand in line for hours so they could write critical opinion pieces, game footage, etc etc for a game still in development that will improve over time and has potential to be successful. Right sure. And no im not going to an extreme.
Having a different opinion to you isnt an extreme, its an opinion, and once again, we already "debunked" the everyone claim. And they are not "ONLY" going by feedback from the people who played, they just said its "more weighted", perhaps you should watch the PAX panel and the lastest livestream again.
3: If the devs get rid of the QTE, great! I've explained why I'm quite confident that they won't. But, if they do... great!
If the devs make the sweet spot on the QTE fixed rather than random, great! I've explained why I'm quite confident that they won't. But, if they do...great!
If the devs decide, instead, to make weapons or characters or weapon abilities glow/glimmer, great. I've explained why I'm quite confident that they won't. But, if they do...great!
You gave an opinion of why they wont, not an explaination, and that opinion of yours isnt very convincing at all, if it was then more people would be taking your side in the discussion, but you stance seems quite lonely.
I'm tired of arguing about stuff that should not be a heated argument.
And, I'm tired of explaining stuff I think should be easily understood.
So, I'm done with this thread.
Y'all have a great weekend.
Heated? Only you have reduced yourself to throwing personal insults during this discussion between us. I'm quite calm and rational most of the time. The reason you struggle to explain things, is quite obvious, you make assumptions, you contridict your own statements constantly, you change you stance on the QTE quite flipantly. One would imagine it would be quite hard to explain things, when one doesnt understand them themselves.
And its a shame you are done with this thread. I quite liked the free bumps, and the amusement of you spinning in circles. Perhaps another white knight will come along.
I can't seem to think any U.I. that'll work in any game I've seen ... except for one
( yes, i had to draw my idea. And ignore the smudges ... they weren't supposed to be there. And yes, i did think about " down-scaling " the entire drawing. But then again, the future U.I. Editor can fix that xD
This is not an idea for the QTE Bar. Rather, an idea for the Overall U.I. Design - rather, the U.I. being Transparent & blending into the BackGround. ( It being Transparent is the most important part, so it won't seem so clunky )
The Areas that'll be fairly visible ... would be the 6 Areas that I Circle in the 2nd Image
Where the 2 lines Intersect on both sides
And the " 4 Arrow-Pointers " ... or at least the Tips
How much Transparency by default ? I'm thinking of something similar to Final Fantasy 15 Style ( a.k.a. Final Fantasy Versus 13 )
I wasn't at Pax, I was on the other side of the planet in Australia watching the PR event and observing others on hand experiences.
So giving Intrepid it's valid* first hand experience with the demo build is not possible.
However I can read an audience and i can see passed PR tongue waggling.
When the combat system was brought up at the event, The panel was defensive.
There was no community 'Standing ovation' regarding QTE approval, let alone a round of applause. No the "overall positive feedback" was mutterings and mumbles.
Now as an Aussie MMO player i am used to compensating for high latency and I can guarantee that with a 100+ ping the QTE UI system will be akin to combat leprosy.
And will not be Subscription worthy in this day and age of the industry and MMO genre.
Squabbling over semantics and definitions is just circumventing.
Admittedly ... i could not remember where I seen something like this before. But XenoBlade Chronicles / Final Fantasy kept coming to mind. So I'm not sure if something like this was done before. ( positive that it did not happen before )
EDIT: Above Segment ... I'm referring to the Image i had Drawn
The Ability Bar(s) can be in Bottom-Middle(ish ?)
When you hover the Cursor in Bottom-Left ... " Panel " , In-game Menu Bar* will appear - via Character Equipment Screen, Map, Quests and Inventory, Abilities, Artisans, etc ...
When you hover the Cursor in Bottom-Right ... " Panel " ... idk . ( did not think that far ahead tbh )
Same goes for other 2 Areas ( Left-most & Right-most ) did not plan ahead for those either
Now About the QTE U.I. ... honestly the only thing i can think of is a .. " Magical-Visual Queue " that'll vary depending on the Archetype(s) chosen & The Weapon chosen. Not like a ... " Taste-the-Rainbow " Vibe , but rather not apparent
Similar to this image ( above ), but not quite.
Clear and/or Clear-ish with slight pigment of color(s) ( variety in colors ? ) . In other words ... the " Clearness " being the most dominant over any ( potential ) colors.
The only problem i see with visual queues is that it might make Combat kinda predictable.
As I have mentioned previously and in other posts.
I would like to see (QTE/UI) evolved, and the combo/focus system integrated into audiovisual/animation in game assets and cues. allowing actual massive multiplayer interactive counter play with dynamic combat reads and tells.
Since we know it's based around the '1' key and weapon specifics. Lets entertain the possibility the the (QTE/UI) effect could be applied to the weapon as an aura effect (simplicity sake).
That's right i am suggesting that the 'shiny' items we all pursue actually now have a function*.
And that these auras* could be attributed to augments, gem slots*, dungeon loot, crafting and dare i say the cosmetic cash shop....
Now you have a customized cosmetic system with a direct functional use....I think that's an original concept, and a harmonious combination of MMO systems that enhance each other exponentially.
@Eragale I consider an element predictability an asset when combating a worthy opponent.
I would rather fight the other player not the UI with forced RNG by design or their UI for that matter. under the pretense of combat complexity, which it isn't... I think the UI system is an out of date hindrance and garbage trope of the genre IMO.
Though a majority of us want to rekindle our senses of MMO nostalgia proposed to us by Intrepid/Ashes. we should not inherently skull drag decade old solutions to out of date problems, Heavy reliance on UI combat compromises being 1 of many.
You are already reading predictable* combat animations. Now you just have an additional aura* algorithm to be situationally aware of during combat.
There is already going to be a plethora of effects* my suggested Function&Form alternative to the UI reliance is simple, elegant, offering an extra layer of dynamics and progression. Even though many may have come to a similar conclusion. I am not declaring it as my original idea* patent pending....
It's not the easy solution, but the really good things never are.
I am however yet to see it implemented and would be willing to bet that players would pay a subscription for it.
So by the definition of skill, being able to achieve a random sweet spot can be skillful but if you look at it and attempt to measure skill as a quantity as in the effort equals the amount of skill.we can make a chart based of which needs more skill then
Static Sweet spot requires 1. Memorization - both on a mental and physical level 2. Time management - knowing the exact amount of time it will take to use said sweet spot will allow you to raise apm, this isn't useful for all classes but is important. (APM - Actions per minute) 3. Allows more focus to surroundings which makes primary focus combat instead of looking for sweet spot indicator. (Even if its in the middle of the screen or a sword glint, if its static you can look around all the way to the edges of the screen.)
Dynamic Sweet Spot requires 1. Reaction Timing - You need to be able to react and process when to click. Instead of using timed muscle memory, you use twitch muscle memory as in speed of proccessing when the sweet spot is achievable to click said sweet spot. 2. Absorbing Focus - requires you to look for sweet spot condition taking away from surrounding battle. 3. Time Management - Because it's random that means there is a random amount of time you are watching your character, bar, or other hint to sweet spot. If it is a bar and the speed at which the line moves then you can gain muscle memory and learn to determine when it will reach the sweet spot before it reaches.
Both types of Sweet Spots are skillful but different types of skill. Static trains micromanaging multiple skills, times and clicks which is something commonly seen in mmos where group combat is important. While Dynamic is seen in more niche games as far as i have seen. It's generally hard to pull off and make it enjoyable but not impossible.
Now the reason i outlined skill is because video games do require skill. Even the Olympics are considering bringing esports in to compete. Now this is important because the commitee that runs the olympics will bring in games that are easy to nderstand but require high amounts of skill. Static sweet shows possibility for static improvement and is not only more enjoyable to play in my opinion but also more enjoyable to watch, but ultimately is a different and more commonly used type of skill. The ultimate decision on what type of skill is needed is left up to intrepid. I don't mind a Sweet spot in combat but i prefer it to be static instead of dynamic so i can focus on the combat rather than the QTE itself
@DeathsProxy I'm just going to jump in to say that once again you didn't understand anything I wrote. You responded to stuff you think I said that I didn't actually say. And jump back out.
@DeathsProxy I'm just going to jump in to say that once again you didn't understand anything I wrote. You responded to stuff you think I said that I didn't actually say. And jump back out.
Take your bickering to Discord. Nobody paid money to have an android game QTE system implemented into an MMO. It looks terrible. This is my opinion, your opinion is different.
inb4 "i play it 200 times hurr durr" Cut the shit, honestly.
@DeathsProxy I'm just going to jump in to say that once again you didn't understand anything I wrote. You responded to stuff you think I said that I didn't actually say. And jump back out.
Take your bickering to Discord. Nobody paid money to have an android game QTE system implemented into an MMO. It looks terrible. This is my opinion, your opinion is different.
inb4 "i play it 200 times hurr durr" Cut the shit, honestly.
@Whocando I've thought of it myself. Idk, visual queues might also become predictable
Its supposed to be predictable. You must learn what animations lead to what attacks, and then learn how to counter them. Thats essentially how purely skill based game must work (such a chess) you see your oponents move, then you counter.
For example in AA pvp, If i saw a darkrunner, buffing up, and moving into range to shadowstep, soon as i see that effect appear, Id click invul, and most of the time, they would burst combo after they shadowstepped, and waste an entire combo chain on my invul.
I watched their character, I saw what skills they activated, and provided a counter as a response, and if assumed/guesses correctly at their statergy, I can then counter it with my own movesets/skills.
A good Darkrunner might assume that I would invul, after he shadowsteps, and thus take another route/option or plan to counter my counter or even try to "bait" my invul by pretending to get into position to mark/shadowstep.
So yeah having predictable animations isnt a bad thing at all, infact its usually intended.
Comments
Everyone had issues with the combo bar - including the devs, so it's not enough to say "I don't think I met anyone who liked the combo bar."
You need to be specific about what they didn't like. Overwhelmingly, what they didn't like was the UI - especially the placement of the combat bar.
Isarii being a prime example of that.
Just listen to his praise of the combo bar and combat system in the From the Ashes podcast (Episode 20). Isarii also has some issues with the combo bar.
He does not describe the combo bar as terrible - not even close to terrible.
But, he wants significant cosmetic changes.
Just like the other players in the podcast.
I asked players how they liked the combat, no one mentioned tab-target at all.
On the topic of tab-target, Steven explained during PAX that players will be cable to concentrate on acquiring tab-target abilities or concentrate on acquiring action abilities. People can also concentrate on acquiring Focus abilities if they are good at the QTE or pursue non-Focus abilities if they prefer.
I don't think tab-target locks as strongly as it does in EQ and WoW. I was able to kite the Mage around one of the pylons and she didn't seem to able to maintain a lock on me. She had to follow me around the pylon as I would expect to happen in NWO action combat. And, while, avoiding direct confrontation with the Tank, I was also able to use obstacles to avoid taking damage...not 100%, but it worked better than it should have.
The guy who played PvP 20+ times has nerve damage in one hand. He said he physically has issues with some games due to the nerve damage but he was able to find a comfortable method of hitting the combos. He enjoyed the Ashes combat, overall.
If the combat had sucked, he would not have played it 20+ times.
For whatever reason, you seem to be obsessed with extremes.
People either have to be excited about the combat or think the combat is terrible.
I say "It's pre-alpha, you shouldn't judge the combat like it's the finished product" and you say I said don't judge the combat at all.
I say, "The devs are not going to overhaul the combo system based on what some people say who have only watched the game but haven't played it" and you say I said the devs don't want feedback.
It's not about the extremes - it's all about the middle.
I am not "excited" about the PAX combat. I expected to not enjoy the PVP, but the PvP was fun.
Fevir describes the combat as "meh". "Nothing was all that remarkable, nothing was all that terrible, though."
I agree, the combat was "meh". But, "meh" is actually positive feedback for a pre-alpha and excellent this early in development when typically MMORPGs would not have a playable demo and especially would not have playable PvP.
Even Fevir's complaint about the QTE is mostly cosmetic.
I have no hype for Ashes. I have some hope for Ashes.
But, after Landmark, EQNext and Revival...I'm now expecting Ashes to be vaporware. I have no feeling of excitement about the combat.
The combat at PAX was OK fun. And their designs moving forward also sound feasible and potentially fun. They are off on an OK start.
The combat is not a turd. No matter how excited people are, they are not going to stand in line multiple times to repeatedly eat feces that smells and and tastes like feces.
Looks like a turd - everyone agrees. But it's actually chocolate.
Not OMG, amazing, gotta have more chocolate - just OK, run-of-the-mill, not bad chocolate.
The combat was fun enough that people stood in line multiple times to replay the game. Because the combat was not terrible. The Ashes combat was not, for instance, as terrible as when combat was first introduced in Landmark.
I hate PvP. If the combat sucked, I would have only played the PvP once. I only played it the first time to gain better access to the devs in the middle of the demo area than I had on the outskirts of the demo area, but, the combat was fun enough that I ended up playing the PvP 5 times.
If the combat sucked, Isarii would have said, "The combat was as bad as I thought it would be before I played it." Isarii didn't say that.
The combat is "meh", but "meh" is good enough and positive feedback for a pre-alpha this early.
Going back to my pancake batter analogy...
That pancake batter might look like it should taste like crap and should be thrown out, but it actually tastes OK.
No one is overly excited by its taste, as if the finished pancakes are destined to win prizes, but it's too early to be critiquing the batter for not being firm and fluffy - batter isn't expected to be firm and fluffy.
If the pancake batter actually tasted like crap, people would not be standing long-lines repeatedly to get another taste test.
"This pancake batter tastes nasty and needs to be scrapped but, it's my 12th time snagging a sample!"
That shit don't happen.
Rather, the overwhelming response has been, "That pancake batter isn't bad. I'm surprised it tastes as good as it does this early in the process. They should add a little of this and a little of that, but they're off to a good start."
TL;DR
Anyone who wants to know the general response to the combat from people who played it can, again, listen to the podcasts below.
https://dungeoncrawlernetwork.com/from-the-ashes-episode-20-combo-system/
Perhaps you should actually watch my video as its just merely "one example" of what could be potentially done with visual/animated and audio que's, and have been extremely effective in other games. Why couldnt that be applied here? why wouldnt it work here?
Also that analogy is simply terrible.. .you really need to stop with it.
As a Classically Trained Chef, If the batter in question wasnt up to the standard the restaurant serves it would be scrapped each and every time and a well trained and experienced Chef could easily tell the difference between a good or bad mix purely based on its consistancy.
Ultimately your analogy shows one thing, and thats a lack of knowledge within the catering industry in general.
In regards to your "TLDR" theres people in this thread that have said they didnt like it and were at PAX,
There are people such as fevir who played it, and didnt llike the bar.
Currently you are choosing ONLY the peoples input who is positive and denying any claim that the system is bad.
MrStackason put the truth out there, a person who also attended the event, and despite literally telling the truth of his experience
to which you can only really accept as a rational person.... Instead you "attempt" to discredit them
And in the end, all your attempts to do so are somewhat rendered pointless, simply because the developer statement during the last livestream
simply makes any of your claims invalid. They have heard the feedback, and they are taking it onboard.
http://aocwiki.net/Ashes_of_Creation_Livestream_2017-09-15
"Do want your feedback both positive and negative
- Will be taking a second look at the combo system and determine the purpose and how to implement it visually multiple ways"
Keyword, Multiple ways.And finally, attempting to hijack this thread, asserting yourself as some kind of authority on this matter is laughable, and even more so
when you attempt to "redirect" people to another medium, before accusing people of "extreme" views, perhaps one should look at their own
actions before doing so.
My Personal feedback has been given, other peoples feedback has been given, and its been accepted by Intrepid.
What they do with the information and data is up to them, but one thing for sure, its not for you to decide or control
what people say, think or what content they should watch. People will decide that for themselves.
You have very weird notions about what button mashing and spamming are.
Those pro basketball players, they don't have skill. They've just spent hours learning the muscle memory to score baskets from their favorite spots, and now all they do is spam from those points.
I don't see how hitting a random target is skillful, but putting in the effort to master your weapon by isn't. One of the stated goals for the combo system was skillful combat, and I don't understand how anyone can think a QTE provides that.
What I provided was a description of how QTE works in the game that defined QTEs.
The "initiation" isn't the QTE, the sweet spot is the QTE, because the sweet spot is the visual cue you need to respond to and the sweet spot is random. Whether the initiation is random or not doesn't matter.
Again, you have very weird notions about what spamming and button mashing are.
Do you not see the contradiction in your words? If you are no longer watching for the visual cue because you have the rhythm memorized then you aren't reacting to anything, you are hitting the key in the appropriate rhythm for your weapon. There's nothing in there about reaction.
I agree. Its almost as if the fixed sweet spot wouldn't be a QTE at all.
If it's used for skills that have a cooldown, sure, it'll work and I can see it being a mechanic that can separate the laid back players from the "leet" players.
But as something that's tied to the "auto attack" ability.... No. This will drive people away because new players will think they're required/supposed to hit that sweet spot 100% of the time and they'll be turned off by that. Not to mention how tedious it will rapidly become, as I've already mentioned.
The people who do stick around will fall into two camps. One, those who just outright ignore it because "why bother" and Two, those who think you're a scrub if you don't use it and think it must be used at all times always even when you're afk.
Extremes, as in the combat either has to be terrible or awesome.
As in, the you asserting that the combat is so terrible that liking the combat must be due to Buyer Bias, etc.
Here is another example of your extremist thinking.
For some -rather bizarre reason- you think that if I disagree with your suggestions I haven't actually watched your video. I watched your video right after I got back from PAX - Sept 5. When I started posting in this thread dedicated to the video.
It's just bizarre that you can't make simple connections like that.
1: In Ashes combat, the QTE is only triggered by key #1. You do not need to look at the key to press it. You look at the slider bar - which doesn't have to be at the bottom of the screen - that will be customizable. Primary complaint everyone had, but that didn't make the combat terrible.
2: The spell effect example from Unity 3D isn't feasible because there is no practical way to add in the concept of hitting the randomized sweet spot. It might be somewhat possible with the conceit that the spellcaster is also charging spells, though still somewhat problematic since it's starting from a basic attack.
But, it completely falls apart with other weapons like daggers and swords, etc. There is no feasible translation for hitting the randomized sweet spot with those weapons.
You simply suck at analogies.
Intrepid would be the restaurant.
And Jeff Bard would be the classically trained chef.
You would be the untrained consumer who is merely looking at the batter in a video.
Of course, Jeff and Intrepid will scrap a feature on their own if it doesn't meet their standards. What they aren't going to do is toss their food out because some consumer didn't like the way it looked on a YouTube video.
Again, noooo.
For one thing I linked to Fevir twice in my previous post.
You say Fevir didn't like the bar and then say I'm only choosing the people who's input is positive.
Which is again bizarre!!!
Fevir's input is mixed.
He states that the combat is "meh". I agree.
He has issues with the QTE bar. Mostly cosmetic. Most people do.
He also says, "Nothing was remarkable; nothing was all that terrible."
So.... as I've been saying... the combat was not terrible.
Even though Fevir has issues with the QTE, especially the cosmetics and positioning - it wasn't terrible.
That's it.
I haven't said anything like, "Everyone liked the QTE bar."
Rather, what I said is that the vast majority did not think that the QTE bar makes the combat terrible.
Again, it's all about the middle.
I am denying that the system is "bad", yes. But, I am also not saying that the system is great.
The system is "meh". But, "meh" is positive for first iteration playable combat during pre-alpha - especially.
Everyone agrees that the system needs more work - especially the cosmetics and placement of the UI.
The devs are going to be making extensive changes to the UI:
1: Because it's pre-alpha and they finished the first iteration of the combo system mere hours before PAX.
2: They are going to be make adjustments to the QTE based on feedback from players at PAX - especially regarding cosmetics and placement.
3: They will continue to work on the QTE because most people did not complain about the mechanics of the QTE, rather they complained about the presentation of the QTE.
And here's another example of your extremist, delusional reactions
I did not discredit McStackerson's experience.
He told his truth.
Primarily what I said is that simply saying, "I don't think I met anyone who liked the combo bar," doesn't really tell us much because pretty much everyone had issues with the combo bar, especially placement and cosmetics. That's not the same thing as saying, "I think everyone I met wants the devs need to move away from UI-based quick-time events or mini-games during combat." Most people didn't like the QTE bar. That is true.
That doesn't mean that most people thought that the devs need to move away from using it. Most people were content with the dev response that we will be able to customize it.
Um. The last livestream is in agreement with what I've been saying. What would make my claims invalid is if they take your advice and move away from a UI-based QTE and use spell effects and weapon glimmers as the visual cues for the QTE. The devs didn;t say they were doing that in the last livestream. Yep. I have been saying that all along.
None of that hat doesn't contradicts what I've said.
Which is another bizarre statement - as if that is somehow counter to anything I've said.
All feedback has been accepted by Intrepid. No one has claimed otherwise. I have no control over what people say or watch - and I'm not trying to control what people say or watch.
People can say anything they want to or watch anything they want to in these forums as far as I'm concerned - I share info; I don't censor info.
People can decide who or what they want to believe - it's a free world.
You keep calling me delusional and an extremist, which are just personal attacks at this point with zero foundation or proof of such things.
My Buyers Bias statement was actually against stevens statement of "Overwhelmingly Positive". Nice you can remove things from Context though.
Regarding the "anology" yes it is badly formed, and yes the batter if poorly made would be thrown away. It doesnt even take
an expert to see how flawed a QTE in combat is, and even Cabal Online proved this, and was even completely removed
from Cabal Online 2. While im not a game designer, I am a game critic, in this situation I would be a the critic, and if I was in the Kitchen (which if were assuming this analogy to be "exact" as usually we wouldnt see such early footage, id assume id be inside the Kitchen to see it being made, if I saw the pancake mix was poorly made, I would say so. Sure I could wait and see what it would turn out like, but then its too late, its been cooked, its made. You cant "unmake it".
So yes, your analogy is poorly formed, and the catering industry is vastly different from the game design industry for the analogy to even be remotely valid, because in the game industry, you can FIX problems before they occur. You can IMPROVE things, add things, and most importantly, take away things. If I add to much of one ingredient into the pancake mix, I cannot remove it, I cannot change it, by this point its already ruined.
And thats why this input is valid, because changes can be made from the input myself and others have provided.
How is what i said delusional? Another personal attack, I even said "his truth". You were the one trying to "discredit" his statement. Not I.
In agreement with you? How so, they didnt use a poorly formed analogy, and constantly contridict themselves. You took one stance, and through about 10 pages of discussion you have shifted you stances several times, to the point where you have contridicted yourself several times. @mycroft Even kindly pointed out all the contridictions for you.
And multiple ways implies that you are incorrect. Its not just UI elements but more.
You keep saying nothing contridicts what you have said.... but honestly go back and look at what you have said. Obvious contridictions. Mycroft even pointed out some for you.
Once the fixed rhythm of a QTE is relegated to muscle memory, a player won't have to rely on hand-eye coordination anymore to successfully complete those combos.
Playing basketball in real life does not include involve a QTE, keyboards or controllers. Some basketball players can rely on muscle memory to hit free-throws blindfolded.
I really have no clue what you're talking about here.
You are the one using the term "skillful". I haven't said anything about one thing being skillful and another thing not skillful.
I don't know that the effort to master your weapon is "skillful".
But, yeah, a person can be a skillful weapon master in a wide variety of ways.
Um. If your weapon has a bunch of skills on it -which advanced weapons will- and it takes player skill to successfully hit the random sweet spots in the QTE to trigger those skills -which it will- then the QTE provides skillful combat.
Again, tapping out the correct rhythm to successfully hit fixed sweet spots of the QTE combos is skillful.
Spamming and button-mashing can be skillful.
Passing a ball to a teammate by throwing it is skillful. Passing a ball to a teammate by kicking it is skillful. Which type pf passing the rules allow depends on the specific sport. You can't pass the ball by kicking it in basketball. You can't pass the ball by throwing it in soccer (there are exceptions, I know).
The devs want the weapon combo system to require more focus and deliberation than simply mashing buttons quickly - especially simply memorizing key combos and cooldown rotations. Which is why the QTE includes a random sweet spot.
The random sweet spot prevents players from memorizing the timing - which would always be the exact same timing/rhythm with a fixed sweet spot.
Reaction - an action performed or a feeling experienced in response to a situation or event. If you perform the action of pressing the 1 key in order to hit the sweet spot at any point during the quick time event, you are -by definition- reacting. Doesn't matter whether it is a fixed sweet spot or a random sweet spot. So, there is no contradiction. If you have memorized the rhythm of the fixed sweet spot, what you are reacting to is your first press of the 1 key. You don't have to see the bar. You could base the subsequent key presses on the fixed rhythm of the correct presses starting after you press the 1 key to initiate the QTE. If you memorize the correct rhythm. But, because the sweet spot is random in the PAX QTE, you can't simply memorize the timing. rather you have to pay attention to where the sweet spot is each time a new QTE is triggered - in order to successfully hit the sweet spot. Uh no. Fixed sweet spot would still be a QTE. It just would not require the same amount of focused attention to successfully complete as a random QTE. You could button-mash a QTE combo with a fixed sweet spot, if you memorized the fixed timing that the marker hits the sweet spot.
Commonly in the hopes of triggering special combos.
Face-rolling - using one's face to press buttons on a keyboard in rapid succession to cast any available abilities as quickly as possible.
There are button mashing games out there, based around the whole principle but button mashing and QTE are opposing design principles.
Because the button mashing doesn't have to begin immediately after the QTE begins. The button-mashing would begin the first time the marker meets the fixed sweet spot.
The memorized rhythm would include rest notes to match the spaces on either side of the fixed sweet spot.
Once you start the combo, you would be pressing buttons in rapid succession to match the rate of QTEs that are triggered in rapid succession.
Tab target and action are typically opposing design principles, too.
But, this is precisely why the QTE will have a random sweet spot rather than the fixed sweet spot mycroft hopes for.
Have you played God of War? Button mashing to the extreme.
Button mashing is not, hit a button, wait, hit a button, wait, hit a button, wait. It's not even hit hit, wait, hit hit, wait. It is hit a button, hit, hit, hit, hit, hit, hit, hit, hit as quickly as you can.
The moment you start button mashing during a QTE you fail. Fixed or random, button mashing with a QTE is a fail.
Your argument won't fundamentally change, I think everyone has a solid feel for it by now, but please use terminology correctly because if you don't everything just seems ambiguous and the discussion just starts spiraling - which I think has been happening for a while here.
Rapid succession doesn't necessarily mean button mashing to the extreme.
Button-mashing does not inherently mean as quickly as you can.
At what point having a rest note in the rhythm of a QTE combo with a fixed sweet spot is no longer button-mashing depends on at least a couple of factors.
The speed with which the the marker travels across the bar.
The speed with which the subsequent QTE triggers after a successful hit on the sweet spot.
The length of the sweet spot.
The Ashes combos for the Tank's sword are pretty quick, you'd barely need a rest note if the sweet spots were fixed.
If you make a bar were the marker travels slowly to meet the sweet spot and the spaces on either side of the sweet spot are wide enough for a long wait - then, yeah, that is probably a slow time event rather than a quick time event.
"Idea, and not the exact implementation"
And once again, this is just one guys opinion, and for every person that you could find that played and liked it, I could find someone who played and didnt like it. So your initial attempt to sway someone and people in this thread into the position of "Its fun if you played it, and ill only provide examples of people that enjoyed it and not those that dont" is flawed from the start.
If you were unbiased when you replied to that guy with:
"Isarii thought from the preview vid that he wouldn't like the combat, but when he actually tried, he found it to be fun. Enough so that he played the PvP 12 times over the course of 4 days.
A PC Gamer journalist thought he hated the combat before he played it. When he actually played it, he enjoyed the combat immensely."
Then you would also of provided examples of people who didnt enjoy it, because your whole stance WAS "if you played it you would find it fun" where the reality is, "If you played it, you may or may not of found it fun".
MrStackerson Didnt find it fun.
Fevir didnt find it fun.
People in my youtube comments who played didnt find it fun
and theres over 400 comments and growing just for that video alone....
Several blog posts, which ive already linked also display the same distaste for issues
with the current iteration.
On top of this you provide no examples of why my suggestion wouldn't work of using audio/visual/animated ques,
meanwhile many titles have successfully used them, Zelda BoTW, Dark Souls Series, Dauntless, Monster Hunter,
Tera Online.... this list is actually pretty extensive of games that have used them successfully.
How many games are praised for using a QTE system? I think Resident Evil 4 when it released. Some console titles use them for cutscenes..... Rarely are they ever used as a combat mechanic, and when they are, for example the original "God Of War" game and Cabal online they are met with criticism, nor did those systems get carried over to sequels, in God of Wars case, were pushed back to being a cutscene type of QTE only.
Ultimately you can argue about the extreme's of "words" and the semantics, but generally when this begins to happen, its because you lost
your inital arguement, and thats pretty much what happened here. You claims were debunked, your initial argument fell flat, and now
you are nitpicking every detail to "claim back" some ground. Thats why you resorted to personal attacks, thats why you are arguing over semantics now.
And once again its all irrelevant if you think the feedback is good or not, if you think my suggest is good or bad or not, because simply alot of
people who did and didnt play agree with my judgement, which unlike your stance, now has some actual merit to it.
Even people who you are trying to use to "re-enforce" your own arguement, like the concept and what my video had to offer. Which simply undermines any point you try to make when using them as an "alternative" opinion, when those people agree with my suggestion/judgement.
My judgement as displayed in the video is fair. If anything people criticise me for being too fair.
mark: 1:58
It is also absurd to judge a pre-alpha version of a project as if it's the finished product.
(My whole stance was not: If you played it, you would find it fun.
My stance is that it was demonstrably not objectively terrible because people are not going to stand for 18 hours in a line to repeatedly play something that is not fun.
I've stated many times that my stance is pretty much the same as Fevir's - it is not good, but it also isn't bad. It is meh. But, meh is actually a positive at this point in development.
What I said is that people can't give an accurate assessment of it just by watching it - because the common experience at PAX was that people like the combat more than they were expecting to prior to actually playing it.
As Isarii experienced, as Fevir experienced, as I experienced and as Jason and Steven mention in the video I've shared in this post.
I think you would most likely find that playing it is not as terrible as you think - I have no clue whether you would go so far as to think it was fun - some people, I assume, only played the demo once.
Maybe you don't like chocolate, or that type of chocolate - some people don't like chocolate. But, you would learn that it's not actually feces despite how it appears on YouTube.
Again, I'm talking about stuff in the middle and you are going to an extreme.
My main point is the message in the video above - Steven's experience of PAX was that despite the negative feedback from online viewers, everyone who played the demo was extremely positive - so they are going to focus on the feedback from the people who played the demo rather than the feedback of people who did not play the demo, but only watched the vids - because it was common for people who had a negative opinion from watching the combat online to a positive view after playing it.)
And, I'm tired of explaining stuff I think should be easily understood.
Thats confirmed to be false "All positive" would be an extreme you "hate" no?
Everyone knows its pre-alpha. Everyone knows its going to change. Also to note, my video and feedback was seen prior to PAX. And all my complains hold true even after people have tested it. How it gets changed depends on feedback, and not just by those that played, but by those who potentially will and wont play, as they are all potential customers in the end.
"Everyone" was a handful of the games population at PAX, and once again, its already been proven that "everyone" wasnt positive.
Fevir/Blogs/Articles/News pieces and even people like Mr.Stackerson here. So no, not "everyone" was extremely positive.
Thats clearly just PR. One needs to seperate PR from Reality, and no it wasnt just from those that played, also a fallacy, it was "weighted" more
to those that played, but it doesnt outright ignore online feedback. And if people could and did reque MULTIPLE times, then the sample size of people
at PAX is most likely quite small, and also full of dedicated fans, who are not critics in any regard. When you go to buy a graphics card, do you
ask an Nvidia Fanboy, a AMD fanboy or a 3rd party who is neutral or unbiased? Seems like a no-brainer....
Funny that you mentioned that.
"They only know what changes to make if you provide feedback though" holds up. And you contricted yourself. I see the issue you have now. YOU assumed, that the feedback is just from "ONE" group. However I just said if feedback is provided, and just as you said, feedback can come from many different sources, including people at Intrepid. If no one said anything, people would assume its fine. Thus its important feedback is given.
So yes, feedback has to be given to make changes, wether thats steven giving feedback to his own staff, his staff giving feedback to him, the community giving feedback, his mother giving feedback etc etc. So yeah thats completely on you for assuming I was talking about a specific group of people. Also that analogy really is bad.....
So good job contridicting yourself yet again. As my teacher said, you cant teach consistancy.
And no i didnt give feedback assuming it was a "final product". I stated several times in my video that its pre-alpha, and im judging it as a pre-alpha. I mean really....... everyone who follows the game knows this, anyone who doesnt and watches my content gets pre-alpha repeated at them 1000 times. No one is judging this game as a fully finished product... lol.....
Yeah people invested in the game, looking to make a name for themselves totally wouldnt stand in line for hours so they could write critical opinion pieces, game footage, etc etc for a game still in development that will improve over time and has potential to be successful. Right sure. And no im not going to an extreme.
Having a different opinion to you isnt an extreme, its an opinion, and once again, we already "debunked" the everyone claim. And they are not "ONLY" going by feedback from the people who played, they just said its "more weighted", perhaps you should watch the PAX panel and the lastest livestream again.
"Only" would be an extreme after all.
You gave an opinion of why they wont, not an explaination, and that opinion of yours isnt very convincing at all, if it was then more people would be taking your side in the discussion, but you stance seems quite lonely.
Heated? Only you have reduced yourself to throwing personal insults during this discussion between us.
I'm quite calm and rational most of the time. The reason you struggle to explain things, is quite obvious,
you make assumptions, you contridict your own statements constantly, you change you stance on the QTE
quite flipantly. One would imagine it would be quite hard to explain things, when one doesnt understand them
themselves.
And its a shame you are done with this thread. I quite liked the free bumps, and the amusement of you spinning
in circles. Perhaps another white knight will come along.
( yes, i had to draw my idea. And ignore the smudges ... they weren't supposed to be there. And yes, i did think about " down-scaling " the entire drawing. But then again, the future U.I. Editor can fix that xD
This is not an idea for the QTE Bar. Rather, an idea for the Overall U.I. Design - rather, the U.I. being Transparent & blending into the BackGround.
( It being Transparent is the most important part, so it won't seem so clunky )
The Areas that'll be fairly visible ... would be the 6 Areas that I Circle in the 2nd Image
- Where the 2 lines Intersect on both sides
- And the " 4 Arrow-Pointers " ... or at least the Tips
How much Transparency by default ? I'm thinking of something similar to Final Fantasy 15 Style( a.k.a. Final Fantasy Versus 13 )
So giving Intrepid it's valid* first hand experience with the demo build is not possible.
However I can read an audience and i can see passed PR tongue waggling.
When the combat system was brought up at the event, The panel was defensive.
There was no community 'Standing ovation' regarding QTE approval, let alone a round of applause. No the "overall positive feedback" was mutterings and mumbles.
Now as an Aussie MMO player i am used to compensating for high latency and I can guarantee that with a 100+ ping the QTE UI system will be akin to combat leprosy.
And will not be Subscription worthy in this day and age of the industry and MMO genre.
Squabbling over semantics and definitions is just circumventing.
EDIT: Above Segment ... I'm referring to the Image i had Drawn
- The Ability Bar(s) can be in Bottom-Middle(ish ?)
- When you hover the Cursor in Bottom-Left ... " Panel " , In-game Menu Bar* will appear - via Character Equipment Screen, Map, Quests and Inventory, Abilities, Artisans, etc ...
- When you hover the Cursor in Bottom-Right ... " Panel " ... idk . ( did not think that far ahead tbh )
- Same goes for other 2 Areas ( Left-most & Right-most ) did not plan ahead for those either
Not sure what else to say, just brainstorming xD~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Now About the QTE U.I. ... honestly the only thing i can think of is a .. " Magical-Visual Queue " that'll vary depending on the Archetype(s) chosen & The Weapon chosen. Not like a ... " Taste-the-Rainbow " Vibe , but rather not apparent
- Similar to this image ( above ), but not quite.
- Clear and/or Clear-ish with slight pigment of color(s) ( variety in colors ? ) . In other words ... the " Clearness " being the most dominant over any ( potential ) colors.
- The only problem i see with visual queues is that it might make Combat kinda predictable.
Can't think of anything else atmI would like to see (QTE/UI) evolved, and the combo/focus system integrated into audiovisual/animation in game assets and cues. allowing actual massive multiplayer interactive counter play with dynamic combat reads and tells.
Since we know it's based around the '1' key and weapon specifics.
Lets entertain the possibility the the (QTE/UI) effect could be applied to the weapon as an aura effect (simplicity sake).
That's right i am suggesting that the 'shiny' items we all pursue actually now have a function*.
And that these auras* could be attributed to augments, gem slots*, dungeon loot, crafting and dare i say the cosmetic cash shop....
Now you have a customized cosmetic system with a direct functional use....I think that's an original concept, and a harmonious combination of MMO systems that enhance each other exponentially.
you're welcome.
I would rather fight the other player not the UI with forced RNG by design or their UI for that matter. under the pretense of combat complexity, which it isn't... I think the UI system is an out of date hindrance and garbage trope of the genre IMO.
Though a majority of us want to rekindle our senses of MMO nostalgia proposed to us by Intrepid/Ashes. we should not inherently skull drag decade old solutions to out of date problems, Heavy reliance on UI combat compromises being 1 of many.
You are already reading predictable* combat animations. Now you just have an additional aura* algorithm to be situationally aware of during combat.
There is already going to be a plethora of effects* my suggested Function&Form alternative to the UI reliance is simple, elegant, offering an extra layer of dynamics and progression. Even though many may have come to a similar conclusion. I am not declaring it as my original idea* patent pending....
It's not the easy solution, but the really good things never are.
I am however yet to see it implemented and would be willing to bet that players would pay a subscription for it.
So by the definition of skill, being able to achieve a random sweet spot can be skillful but if you look at it and attempt to measure skill as a quantity as in the effort equals the amount of skill.we can make a chart based of which needs more skill then
Static Sweet spot requires
1. Memorization - both on a mental and physical level
2. Time management - knowing the exact amount of time it will take to use said sweet spot will allow you to raise apm, this isn't useful for all classes but is important. (APM - Actions per minute)
3. Allows more focus to surroundings which makes primary focus combat instead of looking for sweet spot indicator. (Even if its in the middle of the screen or a sword glint, if its static you can look around all the way to the edges of the screen.)
Dynamic Sweet Spot requires
1. Reaction Timing - You need to be able to react and process when to click. Instead of using timed muscle memory, you use twitch muscle memory as in speed of proccessing when the sweet spot is achievable to click said sweet spot.
2. Absorbing Focus - requires you to look for sweet spot condition taking away from surrounding battle.
3. Time Management - Because it's random that means there is a random amount of time you are watching your character, bar, or other hint to sweet spot. If it is a bar and the speed at which the line moves then you can gain muscle memory and learn to determine when it will reach the sweet spot before it reaches.
Both types of Sweet Spots are skillful but different types of skill. Static trains micromanaging multiple skills, times and clicks which is something commonly seen in mmos where group combat is important. While Dynamic is seen in more niche games as far as i have seen. It's generally hard to pull off and make it enjoyable but not impossible.
Now the reason i outlined skill is because video games do require skill. Even the Olympics are considering bringing esports in to compete. Now this is important because the commitee that runs the olympics will bring in games that are easy to nderstand but require high amounts of skill. Static sweet shows possibility for static improvement and is not only more enjoyable to play in my opinion but also more enjoyable to watch, but ultimately is a different and more commonly used type of skill. The ultimate decision on what type of skill is needed is left up to intrepid. I don't mind a Sweet spot in combat but i prefer it to be static instead of dynamic so i can focus on the combat rather than the QTE itself
-From Helix GM Jikan
I'm just going to jump in to say that once again you didn't understand anything I wrote. You responded to stuff you think I said that I didn't actually say.
And jump back out.
inb4 "i play it 200 times hurr durr"
Cut the shit, honestly.
Thats essentially how purely skill based game must work (such a chess) you see your oponents move, then you counter.
For example in AA pvp, If i saw a darkrunner, buffing up, and moving into range to shadowstep, soon as i see that effect appear,
Id click invul, and most of the time, they would burst combo after they shadowstepped, and waste an entire combo chain on my invul.
I watched their character, I saw what skills they activated, and provided a counter as a response, and if assumed/guesses correctly at
their statergy, I can then counter it with my own movesets/skills.
A good Darkrunner might assume that I would invul, after he shadowsteps, and thus take another route/option or plan to counter my counter or even try to "bait" my invul by pretending to get into position to mark/shadowstep.
So yeah having predictable animations isnt a bad thing at all, infact its usually intended.